In the wake of the mass shooting at an Aurora, CO, movie theater this past July, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s pro-gun control organization Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) launched the ‘Demand a Plan’ campaign.

A multi-pronged media campaign aimed at garnering support for gun control, the ‘Demand a Plan’ initiative is really misnamed. That is, it’s not urging people to ‘Demand a Plan’ per se (as in, ‘any old plan’), but to ‘Demand MAIG’s Plan,’ to insist that federal lawmakers pass the following gun control measures ASAP:

– Ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips used only for killing multitudes without reloading. NOW.

– Pass a federal firearms trafficking statue – with real penalties for the “straw purchases” that put guns in the hands of criminals and drug gangs. NOW.

Following Aurora the ‘Demand a Plan’ campaign was struggling to attract high-profile celebrities, but now – in light of the recent massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT – it seems as though every celebrity and his/her proverbial brother has joined on (see video below).

According to Mark Glaze, a Bloomberg disciple and the executive director of MAIG, in the week following the Newtown tragedy, support for ‘Demand a Plan’ increased by more than 100,000 people.

“There’s no comparison,” Glaze told the Huffington Post. “Support from celebrities, technology leaders, lawyers, everything has been coming in. Everyone has been coming in the door asking to help. We just shot a PSA with 50 celebrities in Los Angeles and New York.”

Perhaps more of an indicator of its growing popularity, the ‘Demand a Plan’ campaign has gone viral around the Internet thanks to help from the leaders of Silicon Valley.

“We had a conference call two days ago with about 130 participants from dozens of online companies,” said Kenneth Lerer, the co-founder of the The Huffington Post and a ‘Demand A Plan’ organizer. “Over day by day, and week by week, you’ll see things all over the web.”

Twitter ‘Demand a Plan’ Avatar

Indeed. Already ‘Demand a Plan’ operatives have expanded the movement’s presence on Twitter and Facebook, BuzzFeed and other popular social media websites. Additionally, promoters have exploited traditional media outlets. On Wednesday, there was a full-page ‘Demand a Plan’ ad in the New York Times.

Though, the question is, what will the aggregate effect of this ‘Demand a Plan’ media saturation be? Will it really move the needle? Will it sway public opinion into supporting those aforementioned gun control measures?

Well, time will tell (thus far, polling suggests that there’s only been a “moderate change” in public opinion on gun control, as in slightly more people value gun control over gun rights, for more on this click here).

Pew Poll: Gun Control vs. Gun Ownership

With that said, we know that at least one person has been paying keen attention to these calls for gun control: President Obama.

In his weekly address on youtube, via the White House Blog, Obama acknowledged the groundswell of support for a petition calling on his administration “to produce legislation that limits access to guns. While a national dialogue is critical, laws are the only means in which we can reduce the number of people murdered in gun related deaths.”

Currently, that petition has almost 200,000 signatures (it’s unclear whether it was started by MAIG).

In the video (see below) Obama says, “We hear you” – a clear tip of the hat to the efforts of pro-gun control advocates. He then explicitly endorses a renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban (which includes high-capacity magazines), the closing of the inaptly titled ‘gun show’ loophole and touts his recently formed national commission that will propose new measures (more gun control) to prevent gun violence by the end of January.

Bottom line: Hollywood and the President are on board with ‘Demand a Plan.’ Again, the question is: will the public follow suit?

Post your Comments

There is an example of fallacious argumentation called "waving the bloody shirt" and it is considered one of the weakest and least ethical methods of advocacy available. It is where one attempts to draw an emotional response to deflect attention from a weak argument by calling on images that may provoke a sense of vengeance or unreasoning anger. In my experience it is the tool of the demagogue and the sleazy political types who hope to sway minds with emotion so that reasoned thought is avoided. This seems to be the primary tactic of the anti-firearm zealots who seem all too eager to capitalize on dead children to advance their specious goals.
While I can agree that efforts to keep firearms out of the possession of of persons of criminal or delusional intent is laudable and should be something all American citizens should support; and fraudulent purchases for the purpose of gaining such persons possession of firearms should be a matter of severe prosecution; the rest of Mayor Bloomberg's proposal is fraught with danger to a vital part of our Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. The haphazard and misleading miss-definition of nouns like "assault-rifle" and "semi-automatic" display either gross ignorance of the true definition of these words or an egregious attempt to smear those definitions in order to veil the true purpose of the speaker and thus cause conclusions to be made based on fraudulent information.
Both sides of the firearm question have been guilty of using inflammatory and misleading argumentation in this debate, but none so blatantly as those who would abridge the rights of innocent and law-abiding Americans to gratify their own Hoplophobic desires. To make decisions based on these warped perceptions is an affront to the thoughts and intents of the vastly wiser men who crafted the foundation of this nation: our Constitution.
It is also disheartening to see the rational and logical suggestion of improving the security of schools through the presence of persons trained and armed sufficiently to deal with murderous aggressors so disparaged by those supposedly concerned with our children. I would think it obvious that "Gun-Free Zone" posters and best-wishes are no substitute for the proven tactic of using equal or greater force to repel an assault. Why do some in our nation believe that making people into unwilling and unwitting victims somehow is morally or socially acceptable?
I think what troubles me most about many of the persons advocating the disarming of American citizens who have committed no offense other than owning firearms, is that they themselves are too often continually surrounded by armed guards, work behind multiple layers of security, and dwell in homes bristling with electronic and manned defenses. This level of hypocrisy should color the regard that we who are bereft of such benefits give their words and ideas. Why should the life of a politician or a Hollywood personality be more deserving of the highest levels of protection than a school full of young children? Answer me that and then I will consider your position's validity; until then your words are hollow and you unworthy to be called a "leader" in this Nation.

Thank you, Sir; I have admired your work for some time. As I say, I'm not a very good shot anymore so I try to be a marksman with my words. Should anyone wish to do so, they may quote me freely since I hope that my ideas are worthy of wider consideration. May your Holidays be as bright as brass, as joyful as a bullseye, and as warm as fresh gunsmoke! God's grace be with you and yours - Dave Bolin

David Bolin, sir you are extremely succinct and exceedingly erudite. I don't think I have heard/read anyone sum up this issue more completely than you. I am in total agreement with your reasoning and approach. Distinctly possibility that I will blatantly plagarize this post. While definitely letting people know the source of what I am stealing.

You should send your comments to local and national legistratures so they can remember what it's like to be a citizen and the true meaning of laws and amendments. Let them know that agendas from corrupt mayors, ratings grabbing media, and incoherant celebrities will not be tolerated when the reasonable and correct solutions have been already laid on the table.

With this "logic", we must hold Prez. Nobama and Eric Holder accountable for the fast & Furious gunrunning DEBACLE..... Without accountability, these criminals can/will get away with murder..... REMEMBER Brian Terry!

well enough of you all making violent movies, these actors and entertainers that promote them on there talk shows give me a freaking break would you please you bunch of hypocrits you just made fools of yourselves, you want to use your stardom for something then you should have had afund raiser for the families or prayer vigil, but for you peopel that all have played into any movie tv show etc. that used guns and killing and violence what freaking nerve you all have.

When they make these movies, they train with real weapons. Action stars are always at the gun ranges practicing. But cause they're actors, you can't trust them, never know if they're lying or playing a part, much like politicians.

Hollywood can blow me! I am so sick of these ultra-liberal, do what ever you want, no accountability idiots who cause most the problems we have in this society opening their mouths. SHUT THE FUCK UP! All the movies they put out that undermine decent morals then they try to take the high ground like they're "good people", they're a joke!

We do not need more gun control laws.....just enforce the ones we already have, If you add more gun control laws- it would only mean you added more gun laws that were broken to the list in the pass shooting....Close the loopholes in the gun laws......End all "Gun Free Zones"........ and open all states to Conceal Carry if you have a permit for one its good for all.

Mr President I want to know are you going to put a program in place to replace my family's income? Because of the bans you are talking about are going to cut into our family run business "Big time". We run a gun shop, and the haphazard and misleading leading words like "assault-rifle" and "semi-automatic" display either gross ignorance of the true definition of these words or attempt to smear those definitions in order to get what you really want just like your home state. Guns do not kill people....People pull the trigger and kill people. In all the years I have been selling and working on firearms, I have never seen a firearm just jump up and kill someone! I am my family's body guard.. just like all your body guards you have. And I know they will not be giving up their guns so why should I have to!

What I find so very interesting is the amount of "anti-gun" hollywood elites are out there, AND they're making "gun-centric" movies, example, Mark Wahlberg, aka "Marky Mark", is a major anti-gun advocate, yet he stars in some of the most violent movies ever produced, "Shooter", "4 Brothers", "Max Payne", and others, there are a host of actors/actresses that are notoriously anti-gun, but for the sake of the almighty dollar forgo their anti-gun beliefs...Hollywoods Elite are NOT to be trusted, and if you really want to make a difference, boycott movies starring known anti-gun celebrities...

How many places did they name where guns were already banned? oh that's right all of them. get you facts right before you stand for something blindly. In all the shootings these a-holes talked about the bad guy was the only one with a gun there. MAYBE THAT'S WHY THE SHOOTINGS HAPPENED!

Hmm, from what I saw on that video are a few actors who have been mouthpieces for the Brady Campaign for some time like Will Ferell and Courtney Cox, the rest really don't surprise me. I would ask the rest if they ever plan to be in a film or show where a gun is used because that to me would be a bit of a double standard. They are entitled to their opinions and I am entitled not to watch or spend any of my money on their films or their shows. I would also ask them how many have security systems most people cannot afford or armed security at events they attend. If they are so against guns, then perhaps they can fore go the armed security at the Academy Awards or other events.

Yep. They can be useful idiots if they like. I know I'll never support another one of their productions with my money again. I hope any one else reading this who shoots or has a passion for guns and basic respect for our inalienable rights would do the same.

and how many of you use body guards most likley armed to protect you your family or homes, that is the most bunch of crap for you all to put your faces to this tragity from the very things you have been paid alot of money to portray.you peopel should be ashamed of yourselfs, not law abiding gun loving citizens.

Is it just gun violence that you want to end? Well, if you want to end gun violence you'll have impress your elected officials with the facts. 60% of ALL gun violence is gang and gang business activities; like street level drug dealing. Spend a little bit of time educating yourselves and read 2011 National Gang Threat Assessment – Emerging Trends, it is published by the FBI and you can find it at this URL.

After you've digested its contents, pick up the phone and call your local and federal elected officials and ask that they take up the gang issue immediately. The successful reduction of gangs will lead to significantly lower gun violence and drugs in schools. Go do it!